DOCSLIB.ORG

Guidelines on Cryptographic Algorithms Usage and Key Management

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Guidelines on Cryptographic Algorithms Usage and Key Management EPC342-08 Version 7.0 4 November 2017 [X] Public – [ ] Internal Use – [ ] Confidential – [ ] Strictest Confidence Distribution: Publicly available GUIDELINES ON CRYPTOGRAPHIC ALGORITHMS USAGE AND KEY MANAGEMENT Abstract This document defines guidelines on cryptographic algorithms usage and key management. Document Reference EPC342-08 Issue Version 7.0 Date of Issue 22 November 2017 Reason for Issue Maintenance of document Produced by EPC Authorised by EPC Document History This document was first produced by ECBS as TR 406, with its latest ECBS version published in September 2005. The document has been handed over to the EPC which is responsible for its yearly maintenance. DISCLAIMER: Whilst the European Payments Council (EPC) has used its best endeavours to make sure that all the information, data, documentation (including references) and other material in the present document are accurate and complete, it does not accept liability for any errors or omissions. EPC will not be liable for any claims or losses of any nature arising directly or indirectly from use of the information, data, documentation or other material in the present document. Conseil Européen des Paiements AISBL– Cours Saint-Michel 30A – B 1040 Brussels Tel: +32 2 733 35 33 – Fax: +32 2 736 49 88 Enterprise N° 0873.268.927 – www.epc-cep.eu – [email protected] © 2016 Copyright European Payments Council (EPC) AISBL: Reproduction for non-commercial purposes is authorised, with acknowledgement of the source Table of Content MANAGEMENT SUMMARY ............................................................. 5 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................... 7 1.1 Scope of the document ...................................................... 7 1.2 Document structure .......................................................... 7 1.3 Recommendations ............................................................ 8 1.4 Implementation best practices .......................................... 11 2 ALGORITHM TAXONOMY ..................................................... 13 2.1 Technical Characteristics .................................................. 13 2.1.1 Primitives ............................................................. 13 2.1.2 Elementary Constructions....................................... 15 2.2 Typical Usage ................................................................. 16 2.2.1 Confidentiality Protection ....................................... 17 2.2.2 Integrity Protection ............................................... 18 2.3 Legal or Commercial Status.............................................. 19 3 ALGORITHM RELATED DESIGN ISSUES ............................... 20 3.1 Primitives ...................................................................... 20 3.1.1 Unkeyed .............................................................. 20 3.1.2 Symmetric Key ..................................................... 21 3.1.3 Asymmetric key .................................................... 22 3.1.4 Security levels ...................................................... 28 3.1.5 Quantum computing considerations ......................... 30 3.1.6 ISO Recommendation for Financial Services ............. 32 3.1.7 Patents on cryptographic techniques ........................ 32 3.2 Constructions ................................................................. 33 3.2.1 Symmetric Key Encryption ..................................... 33 3.2.2 Asymmetric Encryption .......................................... 35 3.2.3 Hybrid Encryption.................................................. 35 3.2.4 MACs ................................................................... 35 3.2.5 Digital Signatures .................................................. 37 3.2.6 Authenticated Encryption ....................................... 38 3.2.7 Distributed ledger technologies ............................... 39 3.3 Domain of Application...................................................... 42 3.4 Implementation and interoperability issues ........................ 42 3.4.1 Security protocols ................................................. 42 3.4.2 Data formatting issues ........................................... 43 3.4.3 Implementation rules ............................................ 43 3.4.4 Key management impact on interoperability ............. 44 3.4.5 Implementation quality and side-channel attacks ...... 45 3.4.6 Algorithm OIDs ..................................................... 45 4 KEY MANAGEMENT ISSUES .................................................. 46 EPC342-08 v7.0 Guidelines on cryptographic algorithms usage and key management 2 4.1 Symmetric algorithms ..................................................... 46 4.1.1 Key generation ..................................................... 46 4.1.2 Key backup and storage ......................................... 48 4.1.3 Key distribution .................................................... 48 4.1.4 Key installation ..................................................... 49 4.1.5 Key usage and key separation ................................ 49 4.1.6 Key deletion ......................................................... 50 4.1.7 Key cryptoperiod ................................................... 50 4.2 Asymmetric algorithms .................................................... 50 4.2.1 Key generation ..................................................... 51 4.2.2 Example of a hybrid key architecture ....................... 52 4.2.3 Key backup and storage ......................................... 53 4.2.4 Key distribution .................................................... 53 4.2.5 Key agreement and forward secrecy ........................ 54 4.2.6 Public Key installation ............................................ 55 4.2.7 Certificate revocation and expiry ............................. 55 4.2.8 Key usage and key separation ................................ 56 4.2.9 Key deletion and archiving ..................................... 56 4.2.10 Key crypto period .................................................. 57 4.3 Key recovery and key escrow ........................................... 57 5 RANDOM NUMBERS ............................................................. 58 ANNEX I: TERMINOLOGY ............................................................ 59 ANNEX II: BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................... 62 EPC342-08 v7.0 Guidelines on cryptographic algorithms usage and key management 3 List of tables Table 1: Recommendations ......................................................................... 11 Table 2: Implementation best practices ........................................................ 12 Table 3: Matching of techniques and security functionalities ............................ 17 Table 4: Comparison of signature schemes ................................................... 27 Table 5: Equivalent strengths (adapted from [120]) ....................................... 29 Table 6: Patent information ......................................................................... 33 List of figures Figure 1: A technical taxonomy of cryptographic primitives and mechanisms ..... 13 Figure 2: Example of key hierarchy for symmetric keys .................................. 47 Figure 3: A hybrid key hierarchy with asymmetric and symmetric keys (for data confidentiality) .......................................................................................... 52 EPC342-08 v7.0 Guidelines on cryptographic algorithms usage and key management 4 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to the European payments industry, in the field of cryptographic algorithms and related key management issues. It has been written mainly for payment service providers: security officers, risk managers, systems engineers and systems designers. Although its reading does not assume expertise in cryptology, it contains some sections which require a basic mathematical background. There is constant progress in the science of cryptology, either to create new algorithms or to break existing ones, such that any recommendation on cryptographic algorithms and key management is liable to become obsolete before it is published. Also, it is usually an over-simplification to categorise an algorithm or key management technique as being either 'good' or 'bad'. In practice, some are weaker or stronger, and some are subject to one or another type of attack, depending on how and for what they are used. Consequently, the choice of a cryptographic technique to protect data should always be the result of a risk assessment process. This process should consider not only the potential loss in case the cryptographic technique fails to prevent an attack, but also the operational conditions that may allow some kinds of attacks and prevent others. For example, algorithms, which are subject to known plaintext/ciphertext attacks when used in a certain way, may be strong enough if used in another way that does not allow the attacker to access an adequate sample of plaintexts and matching ciphertexts. As most algorithms are subject to attacks that would succeed given sufficient time, this risk assessment should consider the period during which data must be protected. Using a cryptographic algorithm, which is considered as weak by the specialists may be a bad policy decision as it may alter the reputation of a financial institution, although it may have no operational consequences for many systems. A system
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2018-07-11 and for Information to the Iso Member Bodies and to the Tmb Members
    Sergio Mujica Secretary-General TO THE CHAIRS AND SECRETARIES OF ISO COMMITTEES 2018-07-11 AND FOR INFORMATION TO THE ISO MEMBER BODIES AND TO THE TMB MEMBERS ISO/IEC/ITU coordination – New work items Dear Sir or Madam, Please find attached the lists of IEC, ITU and ISO new work items issued in June 2018. If you wish more information about IEC technical committees and subcommittees, please access: http://www.iec.ch/. Click on the last option to the right: Advanced Search and then click on: Documents / Projects / Work Programme. In case of need, a copy of an actual IEC new work item may be obtained by contacting [email protected]. Please note for your information that in the annexed table from IEC the "document reference" 22F/188/NP means a new work item from IEC Committee 22, Subcommittee F. If you wish to look at the ISO new work items, please access: http://isotc.iso.org/pp/. On the ISO Project Portal you can find all information about the ISO projects, by committee, document number or project ID, or choose the option "Stages search" and select "Search" to obtain the annexed list of ISO new work items. Yours sincerely, Sergio Mujica Secretary-General Enclosures ISO New work items 1 of 8 2018-07-11 Alert Detailed alert Timeframe Reference Document title Developing committee VA Registration dCurrent stage Stage date Guidance for multiple organizations implementing a common Warning Warning – NP decision SDT 36 ISO/NP 50009 (ISO50001) EnMS ISO/TC 301 - - 10.60 2018-06-10 Warning Warning – NP decision SDT 36 ISO/NP 31050 Guidance for managing
    [Show full text]
  • On the NIST Lightweight Cryptography Standardization
    On the NIST Lightweight Cryptography Standardization Meltem S¨onmez Turan NIST Lightweight Cryptography Team ECC 2019: 23rd Workshop on Elliptic Curve Cryptography December 2, 2019 Outline • NIST's Cryptography Standards • Overview - Lightweight Cryptography • NIST Lightweight Cryptography Standardization Process • Announcements 1 NIST's Cryptography Standards National Institute of Standards and Technology • Non-regulatory federal agency within U.S. Department of Commerce. • Founded in 1901, known as the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) prior to 1988. • Headquarters in Gaithersburg, Maryland, and laboratories in Boulder, Colorado. • Employs around 6,000 employees and associates. NIST's Mission to promote U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness by advancing measurement science, standards, and technology in ways that enhance economic security and improve our quality of life. 2 NIST Organization Chart Laboratory Programs Computer Security Division • Center for Nanoscale Science and • Cryptographic Technology Technology • Secure Systems and Applications • Communications Technology Lab. • Security Outreach and Integration • Engineering Lab. • Security Components and Mechanisms • Information Technology Lab. • Security Test, Validation and • Material Measurement Lab. Measurements • NIST Center for Neutron Research • Physical Measurement Lab. Information Technology Lab. • Advanced Network Technologies • Applied and Computational Mathematics • Applied Cybersecurity • Computer Security • Information Access • Software and Systems • Statistical
    [Show full text]
  • TS 102 176-1 V2.1.1 (2011-07) Technical Specification
    ETSI TS 102 176-1 V2.1.1 (2011-07) Technical Specification Electronic Signatures and Infrastructures (ESI); Algorithms and Parameters for Secure Electronic Signatures; Part 1: Hash functions and asymmetric algorithms 2 ETSI TS 102 176-1 V2.1.1 (2011-07) Reference RTS/ESI-000080-1 Keywords e-commerce, electronic signature, security ETSI 650 Route des Lucioles F-06921 Sophia Antipolis Cedex - FRANCE Tel.: +33 4 92 94 42 00 Fax: +33 4 93 65 47 16 Siret N° 348 623 562 00017 - NAF 742 C Association à but non lucratif enregistrée à la Sous-Préfecture de Grasse (06) N° 7803/88 Important notice Individual copies of the present document can be downloaded from: http://www.etsi.org The present document may be made available in more than one electronic version or in print. In any case of existing or perceived difference in contents between such versions, the reference version is the Portable Document Format (PDF). In case of dispute, the reference shall be the printing on ETSI printers of the PDF version kept on a specific network drive within ETSI Secretariat. Users of the present document should be aware that the document may be subject to revision or change of status. Information on the current status of this and other ETSI documents is available at http://portal.etsi.org/tb/status/status.asp If you find errors in the present document, please send your comment to one of the following services: http://portal.etsi.org/chaircor/ETSI_support.asp Copyright Notification No part may be reproduced except as authorized by written permission.
    [Show full text]
  • DRAFT Special Publication 800-56A, Recommendation for Pair-Wise Key
    The attached DRAFT document (provided here for historical purposes) has been superseded by the following publication: Publication Number: NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-56A Revision 2 Title: Recommendation for Pair-Wise Key-Establishment Schemes Using Discrete Logarithm Cryptography Publication Date: 05/13/2013 • Final Publication: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-56Ar2 (which links to http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.800-56Ar2.pdf). • Information on other NIST Computer Security Division publications and programs can be found at: http://csrc.nist.gov/ The following information was posted with the attached DRAFT document: Aug 20, 2012 SP 800-56 A Rev.1 DRAFT Recommendation for Pair-Wise Key-Establishment Schemes Using Discrete Logarithm Cryptography (Draft Revision) NIST announces the release of draft revision of Special Publication 800-56A, Recommendation for Pair-Wise Key Establishment Schemes Using Discrete Logarithm Cryptography. SP 800-56A specifies key-establishment schemes based on the discrete logarithm problem over finite fields and elliptic curves, including several variations of Diffie-Hellman and MQV key establishment schemes. The revision is made on the March 2007 version. The main changes are listed in Appendix D. Please submit comments to 56A2012rev-comments @ nist.gov with "Comments on SP 800-56A (Revision)" in the subject line. The comment period closes on October 31, 2012. NIST Special Publication 800-56A Recommendation for Pair-Wise August 2012 Key-Establishment Schemes Using Discrete Logarithm Cryptography (Draft Revision) Elaine Barker, Lily Chen, Miles Smid and Allen Roginsky C O M P U T E R S E C U R I T Y Abstract This Recommendation specifies key-establishment schemes based on the discrete logarithm problem over finite fields and elliptic curves, including several variations of Diffie-Hellman and MQV key establishment schemes.
    [Show full text]
  • BIP Note 18 Binding Implementation Practice (BIP) Note
    Superannuation Transaction Network BIP Note 18 Binding Implementation Practice (BIP) Note Title: TLS Configuration and Cryptography Date: 10 Nov 201 5 Standards Version: 1.0 Scope [ x ] transport layer Status: [ ] Draft [ ] message payload [x ] Ratified [ x ] security Live Date: 25 February 2016 On this date this BIP note will be binding on all participants 1. Change This document sets requirements for SSL/TLS configuration within the STN. 2. Reason for Change Secure message exchange within the STN is fully dependent on HTTPS protocol (HTTP over TLS). SSL 3.0 has existed for at least 15 years. It was superseded by TLS 1.0 which was in turn replaced by TLS 1.1 and TLS 1.2. Cryptography standards used in SSL and early versions of TLS are now deprecated and do not provide sufficient level of security. Clause 6.6(a) of Superannuation Data and Gateway Services Standards for Gateway Operators transaction within the Superannuation Transaction Network document requires STN gateways to use “a minimum level of protection of Transport Layer Security (TLS) of version 1.1 or above”. Majority of the STN gateways supports TLS versions 1.0 through 1.2 at the server side (some gateways still support SSL 3.0). However, only a few gateways support modern TLS versions at the client side resulting majority of transactions within the STN being sent through TLS 1.0 channel. In order to eliminate vulnerabilities of the obsolete SSL/TLS protocols, SSL 3.0 and TLS 1.0 must be completely disabled. Mozilla Foundation recommends not to include TLS 1.0 into “Modern” configuration set for web- servers and limits its usage only for backward-compatibility purposes (given that STN is P2P network with a limited number of participants, backward-compatibility issue is not relevant).
    [Show full text]
  • Cs 255 (Introduction to Cryptography)
    CS 255 (INTRODUCTION TO CRYPTOGRAPHY) DAVID WU Abstract. Notes taken in Professor Boneh’s Introduction to Cryptography course (CS 255) in Winter, 2012. There may be errors! Be warned! Contents 1. 1/11: Introduction and Stream Ciphers 2 1.1. Introduction 2 1.2. History of Cryptography 3 1.3. Stream Ciphers 4 1.4. Pseudorandom Generators (PRGs) 5 1.5. Attacks on Stream Ciphers and OTP 6 1.6. Stream Ciphers in Practice 6 2. 1/18: PRGs and Semantic Security 7 2.1. Secure PRGs 7 2.2. Semantic Security 8 2.3. Generating Random Bits in Practice 9 2.4. Block Ciphers 9 3. 1/23: Block Ciphers 9 3.1. Pseudorandom Functions (PRF) 9 3.2. Data Encryption Standard (DES) 10 3.3. Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) 12 3.4. Exhaustive Search Attacks 12 3.5. More Attacks on Block Ciphers 13 3.6. Block Cipher Modes of Operation 13 4. 1/25: Message Integrity 15 4.1. Message Integrity 15 5. 1/27: Proofs in Cryptography 17 5.1. Time/Space Tradeoff 17 5.2. Proofs in Cryptography 17 6. 1/30: MAC Functions 18 6.1. Message Integrity 18 6.2. MAC Padding 18 6.3. Parallel MAC (PMAC) 19 6.4. One-time MAC 20 6.5. Collision Resistance 21 7. 2/1: Collision Resistance 21 7.1. Collision Resistant Hash Functions 21 7.2. Construction of Collision Resistant Hash Functions 22 7.3. Provably Secure Compression Functions 23 8. 2/6: HMAC And Timing Attacks 23 8.1. HMAC 23 8.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Study on the Use of Cryptographic Techniques in Europe
    Study on the use of cryptographic techniques in Europe [Deliverable – 2011-12-19] Updated on 2012-04-20 II Study on the use of cryptographic techniques in Europe Contributors to this report Authors: Edward Hamilton and Mischa Kriens of Analysys Mason Ltd Rodica Tirtea of ENISA Supervisor of the project: Rodica Tirtea of ENISA ENISA staff involved in the project: Demosthenes Ikonomou, Stefan Schiffner Agreements or Acknowledgements ENISA would like to thank the contributors and reviewers of this study. Study on the use of cryptographic techniques in Europe III About ENISA The European Network and Information Security Agency (ENISA) is a centre of network and information security expertise for the EU, its member states, the private sector and Europe’s citizens. ENISA works with these groups to develop advice and recommendations on good practice in information security. It assists EU member states in implementing relevant EU leg- islation and works to improve the resilience of Europe’s critical information infrastructure and networks. ENISA seeks to enhance existing expertise in EU member states by supporting the development of cross-border communities committed to improving network and information security throughout the EU. More information about ENISA and its work can be found at www.enisa.europa.eu. Contact details For contacting ENISA or for general enquiries on cryptography, please use the following de- tails: E-mail: [email protected] Internet: http://www.enisa.europa.eu Legal notice Notice must be taken that this publication represents the views and interpretations of the au- thors and editors, unless stated otherwise. This publication should not be construed to be a legal action of ENISA or the ENISA bodies unless adopted pursuant to the ENISA Regulation (EC) No 460/2004 as lastly amended by Regulation (EU) No 580/2011.
    [Show full text]
  • Introducing the IBM Z15 - the Enterprise Platform for Mission-Critical Hybrid Multicloud
    IBM United States Hardware Announcement 119-027, dated September 12, 2019 Introducing the IBM z15 - The enterprise platform for mission-critical hybrid multicloud Table of contents 2 Overview 26 Product number 3 Key requirements 57 Publications 3 Planned availability date 60 Technical information 4 Description 72 Terms and conditions 22 Product positioning 74 Prices 24 Statement of general direction 117Order now 118Corrections At a glance Announcing the IBM(R) z15 Today's announcement extends the IBM Z(R) position as the industry-leading platform for mission-critical hybrid cloud, with new innovations across security, data privacy, and resilience. Data privacy and security Pervasive encryption easily encrypts all data associated with an application, database, or cloud service -- whether on premises or in the cloud, at rest or in flight. The IBM z15 extends this beyond the border of the IBM Z environment. • The new IBM Z Data Privacy Passports, in conjunction with IBM z15 and available via an IBM z15 only PID, is being designed to enforce security and privacy protections to data not only on Z, but across platforms. It provides a data-centric security solution that enables data to play an active role in its own protection. For more information about IBM Z Data Privacy Passports V1.0 beta program, see Software Announcement 219-452, dated September 12, 2019. • IBM Z Data Privacy for Diagnostics provides clients with the capability to protect sensitive data that may be included in diagnostic dumps. Now sensitive data can be tagged such that it can be identified in dumps with no impact to dump capture times.
    [Show full text]
  • On Robust Key Agreement Based on Public Key Authentication Feng Hao Thales E-Security, Cambridge, UK [email protected]
    1 On Robust Key Agreement Based on Public Key Authentication Feng Hao Thales E-Security, Cambridge, UK [email protected] Abstract—This paper discusses public-key authenticated key Elliptic Curve Cryptography (ECC) [10]. Using ECC essen- agreement protocols. First, we critically analyze several authen- tially replaces the underlying (multiplicative) cyclic group ticated key agreement protocols and uncover various theoretical with another (additive) cyclic group defined over some elliptic and practical flaws. In particular, we present two new attacks on the HMQV protocol, which is currently being standardized curve. The essence of the protocol remains unchanged. by IEEE P1363. The first attack presents a counterexample to The acute problem with the Diffie-Hellman key agreement invalidate the basic authentication in HMQV. The second attack is that it is unauthenticated [2]. While secure against passive is applicable to almost all past schemes, despite that many of attackers, the protocol is inherently vulnerable to active attacks them have formal security proofs. These attacks highlight the such as the man-in-the-middle attack [6]. This is a serious lim- difficulty to design a crypto protocol correctly and suggest the caution one should always take. itation, which for many years has been motivating researchers We further point out that many of the design errors are caused to find a solution [3]–[5], [7], [9], [11], [13], [20]. by sidestepping an important engineering principle, namely To add authentication, we must start with assuming some “Do not assume that a message you receive has a particular shared secret. In general, there are two approaches.
    [Show full text]
  • The Whole Is Less Than the Sum of Its Parts: Constructing More Efficient Lattice-Based Akes Rafael Del Pino, Vadim Lyubashevsky, David Pointcheval
    The Whole is Less Than the Sum of Its Parts: Constructing More Efficient Lattice-Based AKEs Rafael del Pino, Vadim Lyubashevsky, David Pointcheval To cite this version: Rafael del Pino, Vadim Lyubashevsky, David Pointcheval. The Whole is Less Than the Sum of Its Parts: Constructing More Efficient Lattice-Based AKEs. SCN 2016 - 10th International Conference Security and Cryptography for Networks, Aug 2016, Amalfi, Italy. pp.273 - 291, 10.1007/978-3-319- 44618-9_15. hal-01378005 HAL Id: hal-01378005 https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01378005 Submitted on 8 Oct 2016 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. The Whole is Less than the Sum of its Parts: Constructing More Efficient Lattice-Based AKEs? Rafael del Pino1;2;3, Vadim Lyubashevsky4, and David Pointcheval3;2;1 1 INRIA, Paris 2 Ecole´ Normale Sup´erieure,Paris 3 CNRS 4 IBM Research Zurich Abstract. Authenticated Key Exchange (AKE) is the backbone of internet security protocols such as TLS and IKE. A recent announcement by standardization bodies calling for a shift to quantum-resilient crypto has resulted in several AKE proposals from the research community. Be- cause AKE can be generically constructed by combining a digital signature scheme with public key encryption (or a KEM), most of these proposals focused on optimizing the known KEMs and left the authentication part to the generic combination with digital signatures.
    [Show full text]
  • Year 2010 Issues on Cryptographic Algorithms
    Year 2010 Issues on Cryptographic Algorithms Masashi Une and Masayuki Kanda In the financial sector, cryptographic algorithms are used as fundamental techniques for assuring confidentiality and integrity of data used in financial transactions and for authenticating entities involved in the transactions. Currently, the most widely used algorithms appear to be two-key triple DES and RC4 for symmetric ciphers, RSA with a 1024-bit key for an asymmetric cipher and a digital signature, and SHA-1 for a hash function according to international standards and guidelines related to the financial transactions. However, according to academic papers and reports regarding the security evaluation for such algorithms, it is difficult to ensure enough security by using the algorithms for a long time period, such as 10 or 15 years, due to advances in cryptanalysis techniques, improvement of computing power, and so on. To enhance the transition to more secure ones, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) of the United States describes in various guidelines that NIST will no longer approve two-key triple DES, RSA with a 1024-bit key, and SHA-1 as the algorithms suitable for IT systems of the U.S. Federal Government after 2010. It is an important issue how to advance the transition of the algorithms in the financial sector. This paper refers to issues regarding the transition as Year 2010 issues in cryptographic algorithms. To successfully complete the transition by 2010, the deadline set by NIST, it is necessary for financial institutions to begin discussing the issues at the earliest possible date. This paper summarizes security evaluation results of the current algorithms, and describes Year 2010 issues, their impact on the financial industry, and the transition plan announced by NIST.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Standards Catalogue VERSION 6.2
    e-Government Technical Standards Catalogue VERSION 6.2 FINAL September 2005 Technical Standards Catalogue / version 6.2 final / September 2005 1 CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................3 2 CHANGES FROM PREVIOUS VERSION..................................................................................4 3 ISSUES UNDER CONSIDERATION............................................................................................5 4 INTERCONNECTION ...................................................................................................................7 TABLE 1 SPECIFICATIONS FOR INTERCONNECTIVITY.......................................................................7 TABLE 2 SPECIFICATIONS FOR WEB SERVICES ..............................................................................10 5 DATA INTEGRATION ................................................................................................................16 TABLE 3 SPECIFICATIONS FOR DATA INTEGRATION ...........................................................................16 6 CONTENT MANAGEMENT METADATA ...............................................................................19 TABLE 4 SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONTENT MANAGEMENT METADATA .................................................19 TABLE 5 SPECIFICATIONS FOR IDENTIFIERS .......................................................................................20 7 E-SERVICES ACCESS.................................................................................................................23
    [Show full text]